Dismissed¶16

Girish Kumar Agarwal v. Sri Anand Kumar Singh Managing Director Pradeshik Cooperative Dairy Federation Ltd. Lko.

Allahabad HC29 Jan 2025CAPL/2338/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Contempt Application (Civil) 2338 of 2024; non-compliance of writ order dated 16.02.2024; Payment of Gratuity Act Sections 7(3A) and 7; interest on delayed payment of gratuity at 6% per annum; determination/quantum of interest a disputed question of fact outside contempt jurisdiction; compliance held complete; contempt dismissed; notice discharged; Pradeshik Cooperative Dairy Federation Ltd.; Girish Kumar Agarwal v. Anand Kumar Singh; Hon'ble Manish Kumar, J.; Allahabad High Court Lucknow Bench; Order Date 29.1.2025; Neutral Citation 2025:AHC-LKO:6089.

What did the court decide?

No relief to the applicant; contempt application dismissed and notice, if any, stands discharged. ¶16

Girish Kumar Agarwal Vs Sri Anand Kumar Singh Managing Director Pradeshik Cooperative Dairy Federation Ltd. Lko. — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:6089

¶2

Court No. - 17

¶3

Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 2338 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Girish Kumar Agarwal Opposite Party :- Sri Anand Kumar Singh Managing Director Pradeshik Cooperative Dairy Federation Ltd. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Pradeep Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- Lalit Shukla

¶5

Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.

¶6

Shri Anand Kumar Singh, Managing Director, Pradeshik Cooperative Dairy Federation Limted, Lucknow has filed a supplementary counter affidavit against the rejoinder affidavit filed by learned counsel for applicant, which is taken on record.

¶7

The present contempt application has been preferred for alleged non-compliance of the judgment and order dated 16.02.2024. The relevant extract of the same is quoted hereinbelow:-

¶8

"Present petition has been filed stating that although the petitioner has been paid the amount of gratuity, the interest has not been paid to which the petitioner is entitled by virtue of Section 7(3A) of the Payment of Gratuity Act.

¶9

The issue has already been considered and decided by this Court in Writ Petition No.22370 (SS) of 2021 vide order dated 25.10.2021. Thus, following the said judgment, which has been upheld in SLP No.8395 of 2022, the present petition is disposed of directing respondents to pay simple interest at the rate of 6% per annum from 30 days after the date of retirement till the date of actual payment.

¶10

The payment as directed above, shall be made within a period of three months. "

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the short counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent on 23.10.2024 giving details for payment and alleging that the judgment and order dated 16.02.2024 has been complied with but has been disputed by filing a rejoinder affidavit and thereafter, this Court had directed to file an affidavit giving the breakup regarding the payment made to the applicant. The supplementary counter affidavit filed today is also not admitted to the applicant as the payment as directed by the writ court has not been paid to the applicant till date.

¶12

On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that the applicant has been paid the amount which is admissible to be paid by the Corporation along with interest. In case, the applicant has any grievance with regard to the interest paid on the gratuity amount, he has a remedy to file an application under Section 7 of the

¶13

Payment of Gratuity Act, before the prescribed authority and in support of his submission, he has relied upon the judgments passed by this Court in the following cases i.e. Ambrish Dwivedi and others versus Shri Anand Kumar Singh in CAPL No. 3413 of 2023, Ranjeet Singh Bhadauria versus Shri Anand Kumar Singh in CAPL No. 2342 of 2024, Shiv Sant Saxena versus Shri Kunal Silku and another in CAPL No. 1394 of 2023, Ashok Kumar Upadhyaya versus Shri Kunal Silku in CAPL No. 1140 of 2023 and the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in the case of R.N. Dey And Others vs Bhagyabati Pramanik & Others (2000 (4) SCC 400).

¶14

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the records of the case, the Writ Court, as quoted above, has directed for payment of simple interest at the rate of 6% per annum, after the date of retirement till the date of actual payment is made and from the judgment itself it has come out that the dispute on interest is with regard to the payment of gratuity. The supplementary counter affidavit filed today wherein, in para 7 and 8, the details have been given regarding the payment of interest, which is not admitted to the applicant.

¶15

If the applicant is disputing the determination of the interest, the same could not be looked into in the contempt jurisdiction as the disputed question of facts are involved especially when the payment of interest is admitted but determination of amount is not admitted.

¶16

In view of the above, the judgment and order passed by the writ court has been complied with, as such the present contempt application is dismissed .

¶17

Notice, if any, stands discharged.

¶18

Order Date :- 29.1.2025 DiVYa

¶19

Digitally signed by :- DIVYA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Girish Kumar Agarwal v. Sri Anand Kumar Singh Managing Director Pradeshik Cooperative Dairy Federation Ltd. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Girish Kumar Agarwal v. Sri Anand Kumar Singh Managing Director Pradeshik Cooperative Dairy Federation Ltd. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Prem Nath Vs Shri Raj Karan Nayyar Senior Superintendent of Police Dist. Ayodhya

Smt. Prabhawati Vs Sri Santosh Kumar Ojha, Up Ziladhikari, Utraula, Balrampur

Smt. Rani Balmiki Vs Indrajeet Singh, Nagar Ayukt Municipal Commissioner, Nagar Nigam, Lko.

Ajeet Pratap Singh Vs Sri Rakesh Kumar, Executive Officer, Nagar Palika Parishad, Belha, Pratapgarh

Kumari Pushpa Vs Raj Kapur Naib Tehsildar Tehsil Alapur Distt.Ambedkar Nagar

Brijesh Chandra Vs Rajesh Kumar